Once upon a time
we called them “public servants.” Today, most taxpayers struggle to keep a
straight face when this term is used to describe the well-paid, elite who
govern us.

In a state where
the median per capita income is just over $30,000, Gov. Brown, legislators and
other state elected officials will celebrate the holidays with a four percent
pay raise. The California Citizens Compensation Commission, whose members are
appointed by the governor, decided the improved economy and healthy state
budget justified the raise. California lawmakers, who were already the most
generously paid in all 50 states, will now receive $104,115, earning them
$14,774 more per year than the next highest. Of course, this does not count the
additional $176 per day in “walking around money,” living expenses lawmakers
receive for every day the Legislature is in session, amounting to an average of
$34,000.

The governor,
too, is now the highest paid at $190,100—Pennsylvania’s governor is actually
slated to make $723 more, but Gov. Tom Wolf does not accept the salary.

Do Californians
pay their governor, the top executive of a state government responsible to
nearly 40 million constituents, enough? The fact that there is never a shortage
of candidates for this job is an indication that the pay is sufficient. So, the
question arises, why do many government employees receive more than the
governor?

At the local
level, most cities have as their chief executive, a city manager. Of 479 cities
– out a total of 482 – reporting to the state controller, 279 are paid more
than the governor. Of these, 24 receive over $300,000 annually.

For some cities,
paying their top administrator a high salary seems to be a matter of vanity.
Councilmembers, who approve generous compensation, will take the position that
their city deserves a highly-paid manager, the same way some car buyers justify
the purchase of a luxury vehicle. Just as the neighbors may be impressed by the
new Mercedes, neighboring cities will be impressed with their city’s ability to
overpay the help. This, of course, puts pressure on surrounding cities to keep
up with the Joneses.

While some city
hall insiders will argue that higher pay is justified by a larger population,
there seems to be no actual correlation.

Escondido,
California’s most generous city, has been compensating its manager $413,000
annually to serve a population of 151,000. In slightly larger Palmdale, the
manager receives $138,000 to look after 160,000 residents. And then there is
Garden Grove with a population of 177,000 where the city manager gets $89,000.

A few years ago,
the city manager in Bell went to prison for illegally compensating himself
$800,000 per year. However, although it may not be illegal, the city of Vernon
stands out as a candidate for the most profligate in the state. Its top
executive is paid more than $328,000. The city’s population is only 210, which
means that each resident is responsible for over $1,560 to compensate the
manager. (The rumor that Vernon’s top executive insists on being called “Your
Majesty” could not be verified.) Another small city, Gustine in Merced County,
with a population of 5,482 gets the award for most frugal. It pays its city
manager $909 annually.

While there are
other areas of government employee compensation that beg examination, the range
of pay for city managers seems to be the most irrational.

Still, none of
these local administrators is close to the state’s top salary of $3.35 million.
But since the program generates the revenue to pay UCLA football coach Jim
Mora, he is more likely to be criticized for his record more than his salary.